This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at foobar.org
Wed May 29 15:41:00 CEST 2019
Denis Fondras wrote on 29/05/2019 14:11: > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 02:17:43PM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote: >> This proposal aims to increase the reserved IPv4 pool for IXPs to a >> /15 and finetune assignment criteria. >> >> You can find the full proposal at: >> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-05 >> > > Just because of "It no longer provides for IXPs that need more than a > /23 of IPv4 space" I am against this proposal. Could the NCC provide any stats on how many /22s have been assigned under the IXP assignment policy? /23 is 512 hosts, which is large by IXP standards. The PCH IXP directory suggests there are about 20 IXPs worldwide which are larger than 256 connected parties. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2019-05 New Policy Proposal (Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]